HarrisRacing

Great advice so far...but which EXACT parts am I looking for? And yes I have ordered most of my stuff from RHDjapan so far. EXCELLENT prices and service if you can stand a slight wait (especially on OEM parts).

They are relatively small. http://imagizer.imageshack.us/a/img19/5919/oilug.jpg I will start with just one of them. It will be returned to one of my oil pan fittings (I welded 2 -10 AN fittings into the left side of the oil pan) and will catch any "slugs" of oil that may come out of the valve covers and drain the oil back to the oil pan. I will then pipe the vapor outlets to a standard catch can and have my turbo piping pull off of that. The other oil pan AN fitting will be routed to the top of the catch can as well for imporved breathing. I'll start with just one of these, but we will see how it flows first. The second will be added later should I decide to change. This is basically a cheaper replacement to the NISMO oil separator. I will still use a catch can, but this should knock out the majority of any oil slugging issues and return to the pan. As far as leaks, it's plastic and has only one joint at the top of it. I am not installing a BMW engine

Greetings, I am debating going with the OS giken 5 speed gearset + input shaft for my BC stroker + 8374 EFR R32 GTR build and I'm curious what other parts I'd need besides the gearset, input shaft, and center plate for the rebuild. Basically I'm looking for a part numbers or a place to purchase the synchro sets and bearings for transmission overhaul. I'm in the USA and finding parts and information is tough here. I already have the twin coppermix clutch kit, new throwout bearing, and trans mounts. Thank You, Patrick

I've been researching catch cans for a while and you have now convinced me to try the E39 M5 oil catch cans. I am buying a right and left one to try out of the valve covers with returns to the pan for my car. They are cheap enough to try at $40 USD shipped and seem well designed. I'll keep everyone updated. Here is what they look like. http://www.realoem.com/bmw/enUS/showparts?id=DE93-USA---E39-BMW-M5&diagId=11_2653

Gran Turismo is a HUGE reason why I have an R32 GTR. It's just one of the key cars from the game that we went "Why is this SO FAST!?" back then and after research it stuck. I remember when the blue R34 was in FnF and I did say "FINALLY! A GTR!!". Very very very happy to have one here finally and I hate to say, but I sold my extremely rare hardtop turbo MKIV supra to get it.

I was referring to the small(ish) cams, stroker, smaller AR turbine, etc. Looking for nice street powerband. I would say I'm heading in the right track as opposed to super-high-revving. long-duration-cammed, 2.6L. And I don't like the RB30 block idea with the taller deck, etc with the funky fitment issues.

keep it up! looks like a fun project so far. I love build threads!

I'm going for a similar setup to Joey's...bottom end monster. I like the simplicity of the IWG model instead of 2x external gates, dumps, etc. The excessive "Octopus humping a hair dryer" under the hood just wasn't what I was going for on my car.

There's no doubt that oiling issues DO exist in these engines, but I agree they are case by case. My engine (as received) had 5 spun crank mains and 2 rods as well. Also the crank was bent beyond repair and I'm not a fan of grinding cranks in high revving long cranks anyway so that was out. That being said, I think these factory built engines with the "fit bearings to the OD of crank and ID of rod" style of sizing almost dictates a "tighter" tolerance than most builds. Tighter tolerance = less oil lossage out of the bearing surfaces, which equates to the ability to use a smaller oil pump. So after 90% of us rebuild with standard bearings or a little looser tolerance (from polishing burrs from crank, or in your case oversized), then I think the issue is that the factory oil pump starts to fall out of being able to supply the correct VOLUME of oil feeding the bearings (loose bearings need more flow). The head restrictor keeps you close to keeping volume on the crank by reducing what is going up to the head and of course all other baffles, etc, just keep oil to the bearings in general. If you had a continuing starvation problem on track, I would lean towards baffles, breathing, etc, but I think there was something up with the rebuilds (looser tolerances, crank not retaining straightness, etc). That being said, I am a big fan of the larger oil pump volumes in these engines. But I'd also have to recommend: deeper sump, more oil separation, etc...because the bigger pumps will pump the pan dry on factory setups (at least the Tomei oil pump installation manual says this). I don't know if the billet gears you have supply any additional flow, but I would be looking into a replacement with a higher flowing pump if doing a rebuild and DEFINITELY looking for a factory replacement crank.

Car looks awesome so do the parts!

Tell us more!! Wait...do more...get us video!!!

I think it is just the FMW wheel and front compressor cover. I think both of these parts are relatively cheap (likely less than $200 total). You know (based on our previous conversations here) that I was leaning toward the 8375 cast for my build as well since they are $600 US and they would be a great bottom end pump gas setup for a stroker build. I did go overboard on the 8374 EFR simply because I picked one up for $1700 US shipped and the financials just work after pricing in wastegates, FMW turbo, etc. Bad thing is I'm stuck with the .92 IWG housing now unless they release different IWG A/Rs in the future.

But I wanted to add... My math all assumes that the increased stroke (and resultant piston acceleration speed per rpm), doesn't affect the VE table. This was the original question I had and lots of internet searching still didn't provide an answer. So yes, you do get more displacement, which should technically help everywhere, but what if the increased piston speed (vs. standard stroke) reduces VE at high rpms? Then effectively you've almost just moved the power band to the left (good thing really) and let the increased displacement of the stroke help in the bottom and mid rpm range (which again I like on a streetcar), yet lost a little VE at top end (which I agree still should make more HP).

Also I wanted to point out that the research to pick this turbocharger is located in a thread here. It may be a bit long winded, but the data is there. http://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/455509-bc-stroker-275l-turbo-choices/?p=7511249

Perhaps I was unclear. Your logic keeps the assumption that the turbo isn't at it's max limit. I was studying match-bot when looking at my stroker and made the realization that these new "billet" wheels are adding airflow on top end and in Joey's case I would absolutely recommend him change the compressor wheel and let me explain why. His cast wheel 8375 is only rated for 68 lbs/min of airflow. Any more than that and it's horribly inefficient and/or at overspeed (dangerous for turbo) and I'm sure is not recommended by BW engineers. So using his old 2.6L setup (and some VE numbers I have reverse engineered), the match-bot for top end is as follows: 6000, 21 psi, 58 lbs/min, 542 HP 6500, 21 psi, 63.5 lbs/min, 570 HP 7000, 21 psi, 68 lbs/min, 600 HP (Max flow reached) 7500, 19.5 psi, 68 lbs/min, 592HP (max flow held, dropping boost) 8000, 18.5 psi, 68 lbs/min, 542 HP (boost still dropping to maintain max flow) 8500, 18.5 psi, 66.8 lbs/min, 488 HP So this, to me, is a GREAT street turbo for a pumpgas 2.6L setup. It's sustaining boost to pretty dang high rpm levels and is just at the edge of the compressor map. Data here Now the SAME turbo on his new 2.9L: 6000, 21 psi, 65 lbs/min, 602 HP 6500, 19.5 psi, 68 lbs/min, 607 HP (max flow reached, dropping boost to stay on map) 7000, 17.5 psi, 68 lbs/min, 606 HP (Max flow held, still dropping boost) 7500, 16 psi, 68 lbs/min, 594.5 HP (max flow held, dropping boost) 8000, 14.5 psi, 68 lbs/min, 535 HP (max flow held, dropping boost) 8500, 14.5 psi, 66.8 lbs/min, 482 HP So here you see that at 8000-8500 rpms the 2.9L is actually making LESS horsepower than the 2.6L at the SAME airflow limitations (turbo limits) This is because the turbo is falling off of the map at overspeed and I have to drop the boost to keep it in the safe zone. Data here Now the 61.4mm FMW wheel in his existing turbo on his new 2.9L: 6000, 21 psi, 65 lbs/min, 604 HP 6500, 21 psi, 70.6 lbs/min, 634 HP 7000, 21 psi, 76 lbs/min, 670 HP 7500, 20.5 psi, 78 lbs/min, 678 HP (boost lowered, max flow reached) 8000, 19.5 psi, 79 lbs/min, 622 HP (boost lowered, max flow held) 8500, 19.5 psi, 77 lbs/min, 561 HP (boost sustained, max flow dropped) This is why I suggested that Joey look into changing out the cast wheel for the FMW 61.4mm compressor and housing that is found in the EFR turbo. This will allow his 2.9L to still be on the map on top end (thus making 30-80 HP more from 6500-8500 rpm over his existing cast 8375) since the FMW wheel limit is 79 lbs/min and loses NOTHING to the 8375 on bottom end with the turbine choices offered (hence why the billet wheels are slowly taking over). Data here I hope this helps clear up what I was getting at. Patrick PS - I would LOVE to see actual dyno results from this swap Joey!

I completely agree, 6262 or BW EFR 8374 is the biggest I would go on a real streetcar, up to 3.0L. I wonder how far off the compressor maps the 2.6 is with some of these giants? And I guess I will keep wondering because Precision doesn't need no stinkin' compressor maps!

What does it make at 19 psi? I'm curious. I'll likely be running straight pump gas for a while on my setup. The closest E85 station is an hour away.

Don't know yet. Still under the knife currently. (build thread here if you wanted to know where I'm at). Believe me, when I'm done you will have LOTS of data regarding my setup.

Well, every now and then you DO find a killer deal on Ebay and it's not too good to be true. BW 8374 EFR .92 IWG showed up. $1685 USD shipped to my door! Also ordered the RAW brokerage manifold for it. I'm excited for sure. They say the head should be done this week. If this all goes as planned then we will have some AWESOME pictures this weekend...gold valve covers and all. Check out some pictures next to a GT2860r-7 turbo. Patrick

Right, I watched some of your videos...car is nasty! I LIKE IT! I agree with you especially since he has all the hard parts (didn't notice picture at first!), I wouldn't change a thing...going stroker will only make it better.

Gangsta! Loving the black. Loving the Supra. Loving the tag you used

What the ?!?! Maybe the wastegate diaphragm is bad or something? Is the turbo in good shape? I'm perplexed as well. What exactly are you using to log / read boost? Mechanical gauge or electric?

You could be correct. but we'd also have to add the intakes to the twins for maxxing them out. Do you know of any proven hardpipe / suction solutions and costs for the twins? Also I would DEF be going braided lines for twins after messing with the hard lines!! Single piping is dirt cheap after ditching MAFS (which you would in both cases for fairness).

I agree with this until a point... I see no reason to go single if the goals are 450-500 whp total. I would suggest -7 to nearly anyone wanting a nice powerful stock feel...it's an inexpensive and reliable bolt-on solution and they just flat work. OR -9 for those who may need a little more HP (500 whp?), but I wouldn't suggest -5 (550-600 whp) to very many and the supporting mods part is actually the big issue for me. I recently had this debate and sold my twins to install a single on my build. Big power on twins (just turbos - not listing fuel, ecu, etc as this is the same in both cases listed below - prices in US): Tomei manifolds: $700 Tomei dumps = $550 Turbos (-5) = $2200 downpipe = $300 $3750 Total Big power on single: BW 8374 internal Gate turbo = $2300 RAW Brokerage manifold + DP = $2550 $4850 Total So this setup could cost $1k more, but I would almost guarantee these things: 1) As good, if not better response from the single 2) More Overall HP capability from the single 3) Easier service on the single 4) No "shuffle" from the single This being said, a divided, TWIN WASTEGATE single is still about as expensive as above, but starts to cramp the engine bay. I feel like the new BW EFR line carries the most merit in simplicity, cost, technology, included WG, and ease of ownership over ther twins personally. Again, not saying the twins can't make good HP, but I think Geoff with full-race proved alot with the 8374 EFR on his 2.6 bottom end with his car. (704 whp through a cat with a decent boost threshold on HUGE cams).

I can't believe that there aren't gains available from larger cams...call me crazy, but here are the factory specs: BNR32 RB26DETT Solid Intake duration 240° Exhaust duration 236° Intake lift 8.58 Exhaust lift 8.28 Preset valve timing INTAKE 113° Preset valve timing EXHAUST 125° And here are some Tomei "drop-in" examples: Type A Intake duration 260 Exhaust duration 252 Intake lift 9.15 Exhaust lift 9.15 Type B Intake duration 260 (same intake as type A) Exhaust duration 260 Intake lift 9.15 Exhaust lift 9.15 * Type A Designed to best suit the stock & N1 turbos for optimum performance balance of low to mid range torque. The Exhaust cams duration was reduced to maintain best idling. * Type B By extending the duration timing compared to the Type A Poncams, both response and peak power was raised and these camshafts best compliment the mid to large size turbo charged applications. How can one say that they won't make more horsepower with more duaration and lift? surely this is a myth?! Perhaps the gains aren't there with some turbo / valvetrain setups, but I assure you there will be a powerband difference between STOCK, A and B in nothing more than lift alone. Now, does everyone have the mods to support the flow / overlap? Who knows. My experience with streetcars with turbos and cams, stay on the small side of duration. I chose Poncam A's for my 2.75L stroker motor with ported head, +0.5mm SS valves, retainers, springs, etc. Just wanted a touch more duration and lift than factory. I won't be able to tell you what they do different, but then again, I'm pretty extreme on setup with BW 8374EFR turbo and all.